WesWorld

Not yet but I will. The larger ships would reuse the guns from the IDs ala Vanguard. I can build a couple of them with 6x13.5" guns each on 25,000 tons.

Quoted

given that I'm perhaps countering 15 - 18 kt ships with 20-22 kt ships

Even 22,000tons doesn't give a clear margin of superiority though. I tried to see what it would take to go with 9x12" but ended up around 28000tons, which is far too massive. Might as well just go to 15" instead and get a much more capable vessel.

No, it doesn't give a clear margin of superiority. I may have to suffice for a "margin of betterness". I'm not going to become suddenly rich in this sim.

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Hmm...have the Dutch been spying on me?

Actually, no. Though your forecast post did somewhat lead to it, the general likelyhood of treaty failure was more of a driver. I started trying to guess at what the post-treaty world (not just India) will generate in terms of needs.

It seems likely that to "beat" the existing heavy cruisers folks will upgun and upsize, which puts them in the range of the various ACRs / BCs, so they will want to match beat those to. So how to compete/beat the vessels resulting from that consideration?

It promises to lead to an upward spiral in cruiser size which will quickly become unmanageable. Either one plays the game, finds alternatives, or does not compete.

It's mental exercises like this that make treaties look appealing: at least there's the offer of long-term stability.

Quoted

So how to compete/beat the vessels resulting from that consideration?

Build 40-45000ton vessels with 381mm guns. They're cheaper instead of adopting a high-low mix.

I managed to stuff 9x12" guns, 9" belt, 4 " deck, and 31 knots into 23,000 tons.

I prefere 4 20,000t ships than 2 40,000t white elephants.

Yes cruiser size are going to spiral as soon as the Treaty ends. Im putting a ceiling of 30,000 tons on the RAN, thats what determined the size of Lion.

You and I are going to run into a "number versus capability" problem. If we have enough ships to cover the jobs, they might not be big enough to do them.

Maybe I should just annex Australia? Adds to my industrial capacity and certainly makes your plans simpler...

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
It's mental exercises like this that make treaties look appealing: at least there's the offer of long-term stability.

In my opinon it's why the Dutch have been pro-treaty. They desire to build an maintain a reasonable fleet without having to worry about a runaway arms race that obseletes everything long before they wear out.

Then there's the consideration of infrastructure for large displacements. You can expand the beam and erode hull form, our you can go longer- with a longer dock or deepen the draft. If I deepen the draft do I fit my harbors? Tjilapilat is 30', the north channel out of Soerbaja is ~29' as I recall, so those are already restricted to cruisers. I will pass the Amsterdam-North Sea canal, but what about Suez- that's 34', but warplanning already projects that Asir will close the Red Sea..but... argh.

On Australia- I'd love to see an Indian announcement to that regard...and the Commonwealth's reaction !!!

Quoted

On Australia- I'd love to see an Indian announcement to that regard...and the Commonwealth's reaction !!!

Well, the reaction from the United Kingdom would likely involve the Battle Cruiser Squadron and Fast Carrier Squadron transiting the Suez Canal in record time, arriving shortly after some indiscreet diplomacy.

Quoted

On Australia- I'd love to see an Indian announcement to that regard...and the Commonwealth's reaction !!!

"Crikey, does it mean we have to like curried 'roo, mate?"

Oh the horror!

Yup that NvC factor is going to cause some problems. But if we merged, what would be the fun in that?

Oyama Type (11")

India Battlecruiser laid down 1937

Displacement:
21,966 t light; 23,008 t standard; 24,800 t normal; 26,135 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
720.00 ft / 700.00 ft x 87.00 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)
219.45 m / 213.36 m x 26.52 m x 7.62 m

Armament:
8 - 11.02" / 280 mm guns (2x4 guns), 669.80lbs / 303.81kg shells, 1937 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
16 - 4.92" / 125 mm guns (8x2 guns), 59.59lbs / 27.03kg shells, 1937 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.38" / 35.1 mm guns (8x2 guns), 1.32lbs / 0.60kg shells, 1937 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
16 - 0.59" / 15.0 mm guns (4 mounts), 0.10lbs / 0.05kg shells, 1937 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 14 raised guns
Weight of broadside 6,335 lbs / 2,873 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 12.0" / 305 mm 455.00 ft / 138.68 m 13.00 ft / 3.96 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.00" / 25 mm 455.00 ft / 138.68 m 25.00 ft / 7.62 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 11.0" / 279 mm 9.00" / 229 mm 11.0" / 279 mm
2nd: 1.50" / 38 mm - -

- Armour deck: 3.50" / 89 mm, Conning tower: 11.00" / 279 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 127,345 shp / 95,000 Kw = 32.02 kts
Range 14,200nm at 12.00 kts (Bunkerage = 3,226 tons)

Complement:
987 - 1,284

Cost:
£10.517 million / $42.067 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 792 tons, 3.2 %
Armour: 7,866 tons, 31.7 %
- Belts: 3,026 tons, 12.2 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 421 tons, 1.7 %
- Armament: 1,297 tons, 5.2 %
- Armour Deck: 2,921 tons, 11.8 %
- Conning Tower: 202 tons, 0.8 %
Machinery: 3,530 tons, 14.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 9,653 tons, 38.9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,834 tons, 11.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 125 tons, 0.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
32,628 lbs / 14,800 Kg = 48.7 x 11.0 " / 280 mm shells or 3.9 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.21
Metacentric height 5.8 ft / 1.8 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 55 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.42
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.10

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.570
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.05 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 30.48 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.01 degrees
Stern overhang: 6.00 ft / 1.83 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 30.00 ft / 9.14 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Mid (50 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Stern: 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Average freeboard: 24.48 ft / 7.46 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 93.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 208.9 %
Waterplane Area: 45,111 Square feet or 4,191 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 116 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 150 lbs/sq ft or 734 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.96
- Longitudinal: 1.44
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oyama Type (12" reduced)

India Battlecruiser laid down 1937

Displacement:
21,990 t light; 23,164 t standard; 24,950 t normal; 26,279 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
720.00 ft / 700.00 ft x 87.00 ft x 27.00 ft (normal load)
219.45 m / 213.36 m x 26.52 m x 8.23 m

Armament:
8 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (2x4 guns), 864.00lbs / 391.90kg shells, 1937 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
16 - 4.92" / 125 mm guns (8x2 guns), 59.59lbs / 27.03kg shells, 1937 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.38" / 35.1 mm guns (8x2 guns), 1.32lbs / 0.60kg shells, 1937 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
16 - 0.59" / 15.0 mm guns (4 mounts), 0.10lbs / 0.05kg shells, 1937 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 14 raised guns
Weight of broadside 7,888 lbs / 3,578 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 11.0" / 279 mm 455.00 ft / 138.68 m 13.00 ft / 3.96 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.00" / 25 mm 455.00 ft / 138.68 m 25.00 ft / 7.62 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 12.0" / 305 mm 9.00" / 229 mm 12.0" / 305 mm
2nd: 1.50" / 38 mm - -

- Armour deck: 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower: 11.00" / 279 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 124,666 shp / 93,000 Kw = 32.01 kts
Range 14,200nm at 12.00 kts (Bunkerage = 3,215 tons)

Complement:
992 - 1,290

Cost:
£11.354 million / $45.418 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 986 tons, 4.0 %
Armour: 7,308 tons, 29.3 %
- Belts: 2,767 tons, 11.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 421 tons, 1.7 %
- Armament: 1,505 tons, 6.0 %
- Armour Deck: 2,412 tons, 9.7 %
- Conning Tower: 203 tons, 0.8 %
Machinery: 3,455 tons, 13.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 10,116 tons, 40.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,960 tons, 11.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 125 tons, 0.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
28,987 lbs / 13,148 Kg = 33.6 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 3.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.17
Metacentric height 5.4 ft / 1.6 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 55 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.52
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.10

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.531
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.05 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 30.61 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 56 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.01 degrees
Stern overhang: 6.00 ft / 1.83 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 30.00 ft / 9.14 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Mid (50 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 23.72 ft / 7.23 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 99.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 191.3 %
Waterplane Area: 43,454 Square feet or 4,037 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 112 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 161 lbs/sq ft or 784 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.52
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

I am impressed with these designs - they seem to be rather a bit more tough than Samal/Bohol.

Then again, I already have them filling this role - I actually need some larger capital ships.

Quoted

But if we merged, what would be the fun in that?

Agreeing on nomenclature for warships...

Producing a Bollywood movie about Australian Rules Football...

Trying to avoid going to war with ourselves...

"Trying to avoid going to war with ourselves..."

That is what rugby is for.

Ah but we are already doing that!

There's at least 3 Enterprises in the Commonwealth, and Australia is already at heads with GB over GB naming its polar ships Scott and Shackelton!

Oh and we (me and ShinRa) almost went to war. It was one of the ways we explored to get around Cleito!


The Oyamas look good, but they seem undegunned to me. (what can I say when Im planning similar size ships firing 1400lb shells!) I dont think they need more than a 9" belt.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Ah but we are already doing that!

There's at least 3 Enterprises in the Commonwealth,

2. I revised the arctic schooner to another name. And I'm surpised the Crown let you get away with having that monstrosity of yours named after such a dignified RN Cruiser that's still in service....*cough*

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Oh and we (me and ShinRa) almost went to war. It was one of the ways we explored to get around Cleito!

But then I realized....what do I need with all that sand and dust and strange hopping creatures. So I'm just sending him my criminals and the mentally ill (thus explaining the aforementioned monstrosity hybrid). (:

Hmm they must have liked the cold very much because they never arrived here. Oh wait they do love the ice and cold, I seem to recall a certain monstrosity operating over that junk heap you Canucks call an Aircraft Carrier. Plus that other wanna be airship!

AIGF

...but Oz got Argus. We got Hermes. (: